> Could this water some time in the future "rise up" once more and create a second worldwide flood?

> Could this water some time in the future "rise up" once more and create a second worldwide flood? It could create a flood . Not a second one. > could it be that this is where all of the water has gone? No. The process doesn't seem reversible. Analogy. If someone tells you they filled a balloon with water and pierced it, and later you see a balloon with water, you may believe they un-pierced it, unless you know physics and you learned that you can't un-pierce this balloon just like that. Then, the more likely explanation is either that someone filled another balloon, or that they didn't pierce it after all. If the great flood had been real, either we'd find evidence of there being a lot less oceans in the Pleistocene (which we do not), or we'd come from another planet. (But then, how would we have traveled? Why is there no evidence of it? Why do we fit perfectly in a common phylogeny with all other species?) All in all, that theory doesn't ( puts on sunglasses ) hold water.

Posted by espadrine on Jun 13, 2014, 10:41 AM

Tags

• hackernews (Other)

Related issues

• Not sure what you suggest to do.
• Why is this not yet published on the official website and why is there no CVE?
• The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained&#x2...
• The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
• (My comment is about detached houses).
• The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...